Literature DB >> 21803973

The environmental impact of beef production in the United States: 1977 compared with 2007.

J L Capper1.   

Abstract

Consumers often perceive that the modern beef production system has an environmental impact far greater than that of historical systems, with improved efficiency being achieved at the expense of greenhouse gas emissions. The objective of this study was to compare the environmental impact of modern (2007) US beef production with production practices characteristic of the US beef system in 1977. A deterministic model based on the metabolism and nutrient requirements of the beef population was used to quantify resource inputs and waste outputs per billion kilograms of beef. Both the modern and historical production systems were modeled using characteristic management practices, population dynamics, and production data from US beef systems. Modern beef production requires considerably fewer resources than the equivalent system in 1977, with 69.9% of animals, 81.4% of feedstuffs, 87.9% of the water, and only 67.0% of the land required to produce 1 billion kg of beef. Waste outputs were similarly reduced, with modern beef systems producing 81.9% of the manure, 82.3% CH(4), and 88.0% N(2)O per billion kilograms of beef compared with production systems in 1977. The C footprint per billion kilograms of beef produced in 2007 was reduced by 16.3% compared with equivalent beef production in 1977. As the US population increases, it is crucial to continue the improvements in efficiency demonstrated over the past 30 yr to supply the market demand for safe, affordable beef while reducing resource use and mitigating environmental impact.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21803973     DOI: 10.2527/jas.2010-3784

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  28 in total

1.  Evaluation of net protein contribution, methane production, and net returns from beef production as duration of confinement increases in the cow-calf sector1.

Authors:  Jessica R Baber; Jason E Sawyer; Tryon A Wickersham
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-07-02       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  Using the difference in actual and expected calf liveweight relative to its dam liveweight as a statistic for interherd and intraherd benchmarking and genetic evaluations1.

Authors:  Noirin McHugh; Ross D Evans; Donagh P Berry
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-12-17       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 3.  Regulation of lipid deposition in farm animals: Parallels between agriculture and human physiology.

Authors:  Werner G Bergen; Terry D Brandebourg
Journal:  Exp Biol Med (Maywood)       Date:  2016-06

4.  Effect of varying trace mineral supplementation of steers with or without hormone implants on growth and carcass characteristics.

Authors:  Emma K Niedermayer; Olivia N Genther-Schroeder; Daniel D Loy; Stephanie L Hansen
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-04-03       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  The influence of supplemental zinc and ractopamine hydrochloride on trace mineral and nitrogen retention of beef steers.

Authors:  Remy N Carmichael; Olivia N Genther-Schroeder; Christopher P Blank; Erin L Deters; Sarah J Hartman; Emma K Niedermayer; Stephanie L Hansen
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-06-29       Impact factor: 3.159

6.  A mathematical nutrition model adequately predicts beef and dairy cow intake and biological efficiency.

Authors:  Phillip A Lancaster; Michael E Davis; Luis O Tedeschi; Jack J Rutledge; Larry V Cundiff
Journal:  Transl Anim Sci       Date:  2021-12-20

Review 7.  Animal board invited review: genetic possibilities to reduce enteric methane emissions from ruminants.

Authors:  N K Pickering; V H Oddy; J Basarab; K Cammack; B Hayes; R S Hegarty; J Lassen; J C McEwan; S Miller; C S Pinares-Patiño; Y de Haas
Journal:  Animal       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  A Greenhouse Gas and Soil Carbon Model for Estimating the Carbon Footprint of Livestock Production in Canada.

Authors:  Xavier P C Vergé; James A Dyer; Devon E Worth; Ward N Smith; Raymond L Desjardins; Brian G McConkey
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2012-09-04       Impact factor: 2.752

9.  Is the Grass Always Greener? Comparing the Environmental Impact of Conventional, Natural and Grass-Fed Beef Production Systems.

Authors:  Judith L Capper
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2012-04-10       Impact factor: 2.752

10.  Reducing GHG emissions through genetic improvement for feed efficiency: effects on economically important traits and enteric methane production.

Authors:  J A Basarab; K A Beauchemin; V S Baron; K H Ominski; L L Guan; S P Miller; J J Crowley
Journal:  Animal       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.